Title:Coal Country Director: Phylis Geller Release year: 2009 What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The central argument of the film is the coal industry and how it is destroying the environment. It talks about the effects of coal mining, coal processing and burning coal. keeps light on. Coal companies pay for the entertainment. People have electricity. Provide jobs, mining coal salary average is $50,000. It is top employers of the county. Underground is very risky. The blast creates huge noises and dust. Because of the mountain, top removal the surface almost looks like the Grand Canyon. The ecology is disrupted by the mountain top removal. Green lands are destroyed for hundreds of miles. The overburdens are pushed down in the valley. West County Virginia, there is nasty smell in the air. The people are suing the for the mountain top remover. After checking the site, the judge ruled buffer zone, where the mining industry is no more. The mining companies try to reverse the ruling. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? The film mentioned several sustainability problems. West Virginia, there is only job available. Therefore people were scared to lost their job. However, the coal mining industries are using fewer employees because of heavy usage machinery. The waters are becoming very muddy and becoming undrinkable. City group support the people who wanted the coal company shut down. The rebellions are facing threat from the coal companies. Politicians do not pay attention about the coal mining and environmental issue. Processing the coal use chemical to wash of the coal. The coal toxic slurry goes to the impoundment plants. However, sometime this impoundment plants leeks and toxic slurry goes to water. The drinking water is getting worse, people are getting sick, and people have more heart problems, gallbladder problem, and cancer because of pollute water. The water is very toxic from the coal slurry. People cannot go outside. Therefore, they feel like prisoner. The coal mining companies put domes to cover the dust, but many times, it burst. Death rates are higher in the coal mining area. The house price is going down. Burning coal in power plant, are producing a lot of CO2. It produces millions of combustion waste. The communities close to the power plant are in huge risk. People have to choose between job and cancer. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? They wanted to monitor the dust in the town by putting a jar with water. How can they test air quality with that system? The companies are coming up with the clean coal or Carbon sequestration, but it is not a good solution, because it will still have mountain top removal, and the waste has to come back up some way. It cannot vanish. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? Coal companies come up with Reclamation. They plant grass on the coal mining land to create pretty landscape. People were thinking they are doing good job. Unique biodiversity of the area is gone. The film did not elaborate that the revegetated surface plants do not stay long that way. The plants die soon after few years. What audiences does the film best address? Why? This film is made for the general audience. I feel the purpose of the film to let others know about the coal mining industry and its harmful effects. I did not know that US is burning a lot of coal to produce electricity. I thought they produce electricity from Niagara Falls and they buy electricity from Canada. Therefore, this type of film helps the general population like me to know about the affects of coal mining. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? This was a very good film, but the film could show more scientific data instead of just interviewing people. It could add proves about the why reclamation was not a good idea. It could also talk little more about, how is the coal mining disrupted the ecology. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. The coal mining industry is polluting the water. Therefore, Clean water act suggest that fill material cannot be waist material. The judge Heiden went to see the site with a biologist to check it. He has realized the native trees were gone. It was very good that a judge went to investigate before he gave his decision. West Virginia is very poor even though they are lot of mining. This city could prosper like the other cities with tourism and can offer Fishing, canoeing, boating. This way the city will prosper. Energy efficiency, renewable energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, bio-fuels, wind power. Even though, energy from coal is cheaper, but the impact it is producing to the environment is very huge. People want green jobs. People need to know and understand about the problem. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? I wanted to know more about the revegetated surface. Interestingly I found a website that talks positive about the reclamation of the coalmine since it was made by world coal association. It mentioned, by reclamation, the surface area could be simultaneously used for other uses - such as forests, cattle grazing and growing crops. Mine reclamation activities could be the shaping and contouring of spoil piles, replacement of topsoil, seeding with grasses and planting of trees taking place on the mined-out areas. By relocating streams, wildlife, and other valuable resources, the reclaimed land could have many uses, including agriculture, forestry, wildlife habitation and recreation. http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-the-environment/coal-mining-the-environment/
Director: Phylis Geller
Release year: 2009
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of the film is the coal industry and how it is destroying the environment. It talks about the effects of coal mining, coal processing and burning coal. keeps light on. Coal companies pay for the entertainment. People have electricity. Provide jobs, mining coal salary average is $50,000. It is top employers of the county. Underground is very risky. The blast creates huge noises and dust. Because of the mountain, top removal the surface almost looks like the Grand Canyon. The ecology is disrupted by the mountain top removal. Green lands are destroyed for hundreds of miles. The overburdens are pushed down in the valley. West County Virginia, there is nasty smell in the air. The people are suing the for the mountain top remover. After checking the site, the judge ruled buffer zone, where the mining industry is no more. The mining companies try to reverse the ruling.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The film mentioned several sustainability problems. West Virginia, there is only job available. Therefore people were scared to lost their job. However, the coal mining industries are using fewer employees because of heavy usage machinery. The waters are becoming very muddy and becoming undrinkable. City group support the people who wanted the coal company shut down. The rebellions are facing threat from the coal companies. Politicians do not pay attention about the coal mining and environmental issue. Processing the coal use chemical to wash of the coal. The coal toxic slurry goes to the impoundment plants. However, sometime this impoundment plants leeks and toxic slurry goes to water. The drinking water is getting worse, people are getting sick, and people have more heart problems, gallbladder problem, and cancer because of pollute water. The water is very toxic from the coal slurry. People cannot go outside. Therefore, they feel like prisoner. The coal mining companies put domes to cover the dust, but many times, it burst. Death rates are higher in the coal mining area. The house price is going down. Burning coal in power plant, are producing a lot of CO2. It produces millions of combustion waste. The communities close to the power plant are in huge risk. People have to choose between job and cancer.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
They wanted to monitor the dust in the town by putting a jar with water. How can they test air quality with that system? The companies are coming up with the clean coal or Carbon sequestration, but it is not a good solution, because it will still have mountain top removal, and the waste has to come back up some way. It cannot vanish.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Coal companies come up with Reclamation. They plant grass on the coal mining land to create pretty landscape. People were thinking they are doing good job. Unique biodiversity of the area is gone. The film did not elaborate that the revegetated surface plants do not stay long that way. The plants die soon after few years.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
This film is made for the general audience. I feel the purpose of the film to let others know about the coal mining industry and its harmful effects. I did not know that US is burning a lot of coal to produce electricity. I thought they produce electricity from Niagara Falls and they buy electricity from Canada. Therefore, this type of film helps the general population like me to know about the affects of coal mining.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
This was a very good film, but the film could show more scientific data instead of just interviewing people. It could add proves about the why reclamation was not a good idea. It could also talk little more about, how is the coal mining disrupted the ecology.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The coal mining industry is polluting the water. Therefore, Clean water act suggest that fill material cannot be waist material. The judge Heiden went to see the site with a biologist to check it. He has realized the native trees were gone. It was very good that a judge went to investigate before he gave his decision. West Virginia is very poor even though they are lot of mining. This city could prosper like the other cities with tourism and can offer Fishing, canoeing, boating. This way the city will prosper. Energy efficiency, renewable energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, bio-fuels, wind power. Even though, energy from coal is cheaper, but the impact it is producing to the environment is very huge. People want green jobs. People need to know and understand about the problem.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I wanted to know more about the revegetated surface. Interestingly I found a website that talks positive about the reclamation of the coalmine since it was made by world coal association. It mentioned, by reclamation, the surface area could be simultaneously used for other uses - such as forests, cattle grazing and growing crops. Mine reclamation activities could be the shaping and contouring of spoil piles, replacement of topsoil, seeding with grasses and planting of trees taking place on the mined-out areas. By relocating streams, wildlife, and other valuable resources, the reclaimed land could have many uses, including agriculture, forestry, wildlife habitation and recreation.
http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-the-environment/coal-mining-the-environment/